Comments on: Lawsuit http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit geek tools and the scholar Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:08:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Alex Thurgood http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit/comment-page-1#comment-1412 Alex Thurgood Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:01:57 +0000 http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit#comment-1412 <p>Well Thomson are apparently being counselled by EAPD, a fairly large IP law firm, and Virginia is alleged to be one of the 'rocket docket' states so it should turn out to be interesting. The initial complaint is a bit thin on the ground when it comes to justifying where the material breaches have actually occurred, no doubt discovery will be requested in order to determine what actually went on behind the scenes during the development of Zotero, and the capability of Zotero to map ENS to CSL. As for the amount requested in damages, well, it should be reminded that they do not appear to be claiming copyright infringement (unless I've overlooked it), rather more a breach of the terms of the licence agreement that bound GMU to Thomson for having acquired the product, and then trademark infringement for using the word "Endnote" in promoting compatibility. It'll be interesting to see whether the court/jury considers the ENS to be an essential component though, and I seriously doubt that Thomson have lost 10 million in alleged lost sales because of the development of Zotero, that claim might turn out to be rather tough to prove in front of a jury !! If you really want to have an idea of what chances of success this case will have for Thomson, you should look into the previous US case law dealing with interoperability issues, some of it is already quite old, but then the DMCA came along :-(, the same with the trademark infringement claim. Whether or not they are in breach of contract will depend on the facts, the state law binding the contract and any effect that VA law might have on the interpretation or applicability thereof. Alex</p> Well Thomson are apparently being counselled by EAPD, a fairly large IP law firm, and Virginia is alleged to be one of the ‘rocket docket’ states so it should turn out to be interesting. The initial complaint is a bit thin on the ground when it comes to justifying where the material breaches have actually occurred, no doubt discovery will be requested in order to determine what actually went on behind the scenes during the development of Zotero, and the capability of Zotero to map ENS to CSL. As for the amount requested in damages, well, it should be reminded that they do not appear to be claiming copyright infringement (unless I’ve overlooked it), rather more a breach of the terms of the licence agreement that bound GMU to Thomson for having acquired the product, and then trademark infringement for using the word “Endnote” in promoting compatibility. It’ll be interesting to see whether the court/jury considers the ENS to be an essential component though, and I seriously doubt that Thomson have lost 10 million in alleged lost sales because of the development of Zotero, that claim might turn out to be rather tough to prove in front of a jury !! If you really want to have an idea of what chances of success this case will have for Thomson, you should look into the previous US case law dealing with interoperability issues, some of it is already quite old, but then the DMCA came along :-(, the same with the trademark infringement claim. Whether or not they are in breach of contract will depend on the facts, the state law binding the contract and any effect that VA law might have on the interpretation or applicability thereof. Alex

]]> By: Peter Murray http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit/comment-page-1#comment-1411 Peter Murray Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:56:58 +0000 http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit#comment-1411 <p>@Richard -- Great! Thank you.</p> @Richard — Great! Thank you.

]]> By: Richard Karnesky http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit/comment-page-1#comment-1409 Richard Karnesky Mon, 29 Sep 2008 02:57:30 +0000 http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit#comment-1409 <p>@Peter <a href="http://www.courthousenews.com/2008/09/17/ReutersvVirginia.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.courthousenews.com/2008/09/17/ReutersvVirginia.pdf</a> is discretely linked in the Courthouse News Service story.</p> @Peter http://www.courthousenews.com/2008/09/17/ReutersvVirginia.pdf is discretely linked in the Courthouse News Service story.

]]> By: Peter Murray http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit/comment-page-1#comment-1408 Peter Murray Mon, 29 Sep 2008 02:11:05 +0000 http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2008/09/27/lawsuit#comment-1408 <p>I agree that there seems to be no real basis for this. I've got instructions on how to look at the lawsuit in Virginia's court document management system in a <a href="http://dltj.org/article/endnote-zotero-lawsuit/" rel="nofollow">post on my blog</a>, although as of this weekend it doesn't look like the text of the complain has been posted. </p> <p>@Richard Karnesky -- do you have access to it? You seem to be quoting content that is not in the Courthouse News Service story.</p> I agree that there seems to be no real basis for this. I’ve got instructions on how to look at the lawsuit in Virginia’s court document management system in a post on my blog, although as of this weekend it doesn’t look like the text of the complain has been posted.

@Richard Karnesky — do you have access to it? You seem to be quoting content that is not in the Courthouse News Service story.

]]>